Corpus ID: 231632475

ConE: A Concurrent Edit Detection Tool for Large ScaleSoftware Development

@article{Maddila2021ConEAC,
  title={ConE: A Concurrent Edit Detection Tool for Large ScaleSoftware Development},
  author={Chandra Shekhar Maddila and Nachiappan Nagappan and Christian Bird and Georgios Gousios and Arie van Deursen},
  journal={ArXiv},
  year={2021},
  volume={abs/2101.06542}
}
Modern, complex software systems are being continuously extended and adjusted. The developers responsible for this may come from different teams or organizations, and may be distributed over the world. This may make it difficult to keep track of what other developers are doing, which may result in multiple developers concurrently editing the same code areas. This, in turn, may lead to hard-to-merge changes or even merge conflicts, logical bugs that are difficult to detect, duplication of work… Expand

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 52 REFERENCES
Planning for Untangling: Predicting the Difficulty of Merge Conflicts
TLDR
The ability to predict the difficulty of a merge conflict and to identify the underlying factors for its difficulty can help tool builders improve their conflict detection tools to prioritize and warn developers of difficult conflicts. Expand
Semantic Conflict. https://martinfowler.com/bliki/SemanticConflict.html
  • 2020
Software Engineering at Google: Lessons Learned from Programming
  • 2020
Software Engineering at Google: Lessons Learned from Programming Over Time
  • 2020
Understanding predictive factors for merge conflicts
TLDR
Evidence that the likelihood of merge conflict occurrence significantly increases when contributions to be merged are not modular in the sense that they involve files from the same MVC slice (related model, view, and controller files). Expand
An empirical investigation into merge conflicts and their effect on software quality
TLDR
An empirical study about the types, frequency, and impact of merge conflicts, where impact is measured in terms of bug fixing commits associated with conflicts, finds that the code associated with a merge conflict is twice as likely to have a bug. Expand
Leveraging Change Intents for Characterizing and Identifying Large-Review-Effort Changes
TLDR
This paper presents the first study to leverage change intent to characterize and identify Large-Review-Effort (LRE) changes regarding review effort---changes with large review effort, and proposes a feedback-driven and heuristics-based approach to obtain change intents. Expand
Mining Cross-Task Artifact Dependencies from Developer Interactions
TLDR
An approach for mining such dependencies from past developer interactions with engineering artifacts as the basis for live recommending artifacts during change implementation is introduced and it is shown that the approach lists 67% of the correctly recommended artifacts within the top-10 results with real interaction data and tasks from the Mylyn project. Expand
Predicting Merge Conflicts in Collaborative Software Development
TLDR
A machine-learning based conflict predictor that filters out the merge scenarios that are not likely to have conflicts, i.e. safe merge scenarios, is designed, based on 9 light-weight Git feature sets, for predicting merge conflicts. Expand
Spiral of Silence in Recommender Systems
TLDR
It is verified that there is a spiral process for a silent minority in recommender systems where people whose opinions fall into the minority are less likely to give ratings than majority opinion holders and only hardcore users remain to rate for minority opinions when the spiral achieves its steady state. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...